Sunday, 10 March 2013

The Queen is NOT mentioning GBLT rights. GBLT people NOT protected by Commonwealth Charter

Now to the news – specifically the grossly overhyped, badly reported and just damn deceptive variety.

The Commonwealth is producing a new Charter on human rights, in particular rejecting discrimination. The Daily Fail reported on it and (shockingly, I know) got it completely wrong. Then a whole load of blogs grabbed it and ran with it – which is ridiculous because their own headlines don’t match the content.

So, let’s parse this down.

Yes, the Queen will sign this charter, she is the head of the Commonwealth after all.

No, she isn’t speaking out on behalf of GBLT rights. The Queen and her handlers are going to continue her 61 year tradition of pretending we don’t exist. This is not changing. She may speak out in favour of the charter, but that doesn’t include us.

Because the charter doesn’t include us. In fact all these reports that this is an amazing step forwards for GBLT rights and the queen is finally, after 61 years of silence, going to address GBLT people are laughably wrong. Well, it would be laughable if it weren’t so annoying and if so many people weren’t so desperate for any kind of affirmation they’d cling to anything.

The charter does address discrimination. Notably:

“We are implacably opposed to all forms of discrimination, whether rooted in gender, race, colour, creed, political belief or other grounds.”

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity are not included. More, the fact they have drawn up a laundry list of gender, race, colour, creed and political belief tells me they’ve consciously and knowingly excluded GBLT people from these protections.

No, “Other grounds” is not sufficient. There’s certainly no indication that we’re supposed to be included. If it were sufficient, they wouldn’t have included a list of other oppressed groups. More, GBLT people, perhaps more than any other on that list, are continually presented as not existing. We’ve all heard the “ex-gays” and “behaviour” and “lifestyle” and “sin”,  It is even more vital that sexual orientation and gender identity be expressly included because our very existence is denied.

Further, by drawing up a list of several marginalisations and then blatantly NOT including sexuality or gender identity then there is a strong impression that we are not meant to be included.

People have pointed out that we haven’t been included because 41 members of the 54 that make up the Commonwealth still make being GBLT illegal – they’re still part of the genocide – and, therefore, won’t tolerate pro-GBLT language. Note these are the ones that actively make our existence a crime – not those who have no anti-discrimination protections, but actively seek our destruction. I boggle as to how this is supposed to suggest we’re supposed to be INCLUDED by this thing?!

Seriously, work through the logic. A charter on discrimination does not mention GBLT people because 41 out of 54 members of the organisation expressly want us to drop dead or otherwise disappear – a charter on discrimination does not mention GBLT people because THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS COVERED BY THIS CHARTER DO NOT THINK DISCRIMINATION AGAINST US IS WRONG

We are not covered by this charter. We are blatantly not covered by this charter. We have obviously been excluded from this charter. More, our exclusion from this charter can and will be used as an argument that anti-discrimination laws and principles are not meant to include us.

This is not a step forwards. It’s a step backwards. Shame on everyone involved in excluding us and shame on people who bought the hype.